I’m sayin’ somethin’
I'm with Tony. When it comes to telling you what to do in response to the issue of climate change, I’m sayin' nuttin'. But I'm also with Carl Henry as quoted by Tony. So here's some biblical truths that I am willing to say. Maybe they'll help you to think more about climate change.
Creation matters to God. God reckons the world is good (Gen 1, 1 Tim 4:4-5).
Human consumption of things in the world is also good (Gen 1:29, 1 Tim 4:4-5).
The non-human part of creation matters to God, even when it's got nothing to do with you (Job 39-40, Psalm 104).
People matter more to God than the rest of the creation (Gen 1:26-31). Strange, but true (Ps 8:3-8).
The big problem with our world is that human beings are sinners (Gen 3:17-19, Hos 4:1-3, Rom 8:20-21). God's solution to this problem is the gospel of Jesus Christ.
Greed is close to the heart of sin, because it involves desiring the creation above the creator (Eph 5:3, Col 3:5). Mindless over-consumption is an instance of sin, and it is not good (Prov 25:16, 27).
The core business of Jesus' death and resurrection is the salvation of sinners (Rom 3:21-26, 2 Cor 5:17-21).
The scope of Jesus' death and resurrection is the cosmic reconciliation of the entire world (Rom 8:19-23, Col 1:20).
If you're a climate change skeptic and a Christian, that's no excuse to go on consuming more than you should. Put greed to death (Col 3:5). Be patient (Gal 5:22, Jas 5:7). Killing greed and practising patience will have good effects on our world, regardless of whether humans are causing climate change.
If you're a climate change believer and a Christian, don't allow your carbon-reduction ‘good deeds’ to be sullied with smug pride, self-righteous announcements, or condemnation of others who aren't as green as you. Just do it, and praise God (Matt 6:1-4).
The gospel teaches us to love our neighbour (Luke 10:27, Rom 13:9-10, Gal 5:14, Jas 2:8).
“Love your neighbour” is not the great commission, nor is it the gospel.
In order to love your neighbour, you don't need to be inspired with an extra economic or ecological mission or vision. You need to know God's love in Christ, and prayerfully consider about how respond to this love given the relationships and situations you find yourself in.
If your response to people who say that we need to have a wider or global concern is to try to place limits on the command to “love your neighbour”, then you might be seeking to justify yourself (Luke 10:29).
When scientists collaborate, they will get things wrong, because they are sinners (Rom 1:21-23) and they are finite (Job 28).
When scientists collaborate, they will get lots of things right, because they are human beings made in God's image. People who know stuff about ecology and economics will have some good advice about how to love your neighbour.
The entire world will be judged with fire by God (2 Pet 3:7-10).
The judgment of the world should lead us to positive ethical action, not to despair or complacency (2 Pet 3:11-14).
The entire world will be renewed by God (Rom 8:19-23, Rev 21-22).
The entire world will be not be renewed by you.
If you're interested, I've said somethin' about this elsewhere: Is God green? God, the world and us, Is God green? God, the world and Jesus and Is God green? God and the future of the world.
And now I’m with you, Lionel, this is just brilliant, and I hope it gets picked up on the blogosphere!
One comment from your pedantic friend. You wrote
.
I think the adjective is superfluous!
I reckon any overconsumption is sin, mindless or deliberate! And any gluttony is wrong. Although I guess the problem is that we just don’t think about it most of the time.
So although I think ‘mindless’ is unnecessary, perhaps it does draw attention to the fact that we don’t think about this issue enough, and just assume our enormous food intake (and our easy snacking and coffee-ing, even from those of us who don’t seem to put on too much weight) and quickness to turn on the air-conditioner or heater (at the slightest variation from comfort levels) are things that should be carefully examined.
Excellent work, Lionel. I wish I’d said that.
Thanks for your kind comments, Sandy and Tony. Sandy, I guess you’re right that my rhetoric got the better of my precision. And your comment about air-conditioners and heaters is pretty relevant, given the present climate in Sydney and the UK—speaking literally, of course.
Voice of reason, Lionel, as well as voice of Bible.
However air-conditioning is a gift of God, to be received with thankfulness!
@Gordo, absolutely. Stay cool!
Carl Henry was brilliant. It is a shame that so many today overlook his writings. I have been blogging through his 6-volume masterpiece, “God, Revelation & Authority,” which should, in my opinion, be required reading for evangelical pastors. Blessings,
Nicely put!
I’ll add my voice to the chorus. This is a model of biblical sanity on these kind of issues.
And I think your opening lines could also be the first entry in the inaugural 2011 Sola Panel T-shirt Logo Competition. In the spirit of the ‘I’m with stupid’ family of t-shirt designs I give you:
On the front of the shirt:
And on the back:
Great commentary Lionel, two comments.
1. “Climate change”, what happened to “global warming”?
2. “If you’re a climate change believer and a Christian, don’t allow your carbon-reduction ‘good deeds’ to be sullied with smug pride, self-righteous announcements, or condemnation of others who aren’t as green as you. Just do it, and praise God (Matt 6:1-4).”
While the paragraph previous to this one above is one I need to heed, I was intrigued by your comment. I think “doing good climate deeds” has become a bit of blind-spot among some evangelicals. You might struggling with some sin but ‘at least your doing your bit to help reduce carbon.’
Hi Luke, thanks for reading and commenting!
1. I’m not an expert in the field (like most of us), but as I understand it the scientists and commentators prefer to use the term “climate change” because it can be less confusing for the average pundit. “Global warming” was once used by people who wanted to claim that that the mean temperature on the entire globe, averaged across the planet, is rising. However, many people who heard this term (wrongly) assumed that it meant that every individual part of the globe is getting warmer. This is clearly wrong anyway; and most climate models which are used by scientists to support the claim for what was once called “global warming” show that there are actually parts of the globe that are getting cooler (e.g. perhaps Europe and North America)—which is nevertheless more than compensated for by other parts of the globe that are getting significantly warmer (e.g. the Arctic). The problems which these models predict don’t merely come from increasing temperatures, but from the overall climatic changes which are said to lead to more severe weather events, etc. So they’ve used the less confusing term “climate change” to try to communicate this idea. I’m trying to use the words that the climate scientists prefer to use. Hope that helps.
2. That’s a helpful comment, and I agree with you. Actually it could apply equally well to Jesus’ comment in the passage I cited, Matt 6:1-4. I.e. almsgiving may have become a bit of a blind spot amongst some Pharisees and/or disciples of Jesus; they might have been struggling with various sins, but “at least they were doing their bit for the needy”. Jesus’ comment relativises their almsgiving activity by removing the element of public applause and bringing it back to something more fundamental; a person’s relationship with God, which by implication has many more applications than just almsgiving. I was trying to do something similar with carbon-reduction “good deeds”. I’d be interested to know what, in particular, intrigued you about what I said?
A quick (perhaps pedantic) correction to my previous post: instead of using the word “show” I should have said “imply”.
Thanks for the follow up Lionel, by intrigued I only meant I wanted to follow that idea further which you did in you comment, Thanks.
Here in Australia (I assume you’re still overseas studying?) the push is on for a carbon price with luminary Tim Flannery at the public relations helm. If this became an election issue how do we evaluate the merits of this based on the outline you’ve provided?
Hi Luke, here’s a few random suggestions of things that might flow from some of the I’ve said in the post and which might be relevant to the kind of decisions you mentioned:
Value the non-human creation, but value people more.
Take the time to read up on the science. Listen to the scientists both critically and sympathetically. Realise the prejudices and limitations of scientists. Don’t take what they say as gospel; but don’t dismiss it simply because it doesn’t suit your own views.
Ditto for the economists.
Continue to remember the limitations of human activity (the scientific endeavour, economic theory, individual decisions, government policy, taking part in the democratic process, etc.). In response to the gospel, you can and should do good in the world. But it is the gospel itself which ultimately deals with the root problem.
Don’t be scared of consuming the earth’s resources; but be very wary of greed.
Don’t vote for a policy merely because it will be good for your own personal wealth or lifestyle.
Think about the effect of your decisions on people both inside and outside Australia.
Commenting rules
If you would like your comment to be considered for publication, please observe the following rules:
Failure to adhere to these rules will result in your comment being quietly deleted.
If you want to give us feedback but don't want your comments to appear on the blog, DON'T use the form below. Instead, please send us an email or click on the button below.
Your Comment
Commenting is not available in this weblog entry.